Questioning ‘the Holocaust’

My expulsion from both my local branch of PSC in Brighton, and from national PSC, and the upholding of the latter expulsion on appeal last Saturday, raises interesting questions about the right to free thought and speech.

I fully accept the right of PSC to expel me on the basis of my views, if these were found incompatible with the constitution. The issue at stake, however, was my questioning of what we are told about the suffering of Jews under the Nazis.

I shouldn’t need to, but I will make it absolutely clear that I accept that Jews suffered terribly under the Nazis. My questioning is simply about the nature of that suffering. PSC’s constitution, at the time I adopted this position on Brighton & Hove PSC’s closed email group, did not proscribe ‘Holocaust denial’.

Accordingly, I assumed that the Executive’s case against me at the appeal would be the accusation of anti-Semitism. My speech was prepared on this basis, but I discovered that Hugh Lanning’s speech was exclusively related to what I had said about the ‘Holocaust’.

Since the procedure laid down for my appeal had declared that I should make a five minute speech, to be followed by a five-minute speech on behalf of the PSC executive, with no right of reply on my side, I was not able to point out the inconsistency of expelling me for adopting a position which was not against the constitution (even if it now is).

But let’s look a little more carefully as this issue. Some time ago I read Joel Hayward’s MA thesis about revisionism and I met Germar Rudolf, a chemist who carefully evaluated the evidence at Auschwitz and found the conventional story seriously wanting. I then expressed my doubts, and because this earned me the label of ‘Holocaust denier’, I decide the best tactic was not to go on protesting that I was really a revisionist. OK, I thought; what if I am a ‘Holocaust denier?’

Can it really be right to forbid any discussion on this subject which contradicts what has become almost holy writ? The view I hear so often is that if I say the story isn’t entirely credible, then I’m saying that the Jews whose testimony forms the basis of the orthodox story are liars, and that’s anti-Semitism.

But wait a minute. Jews, like anyone else, can make mistakes, may even, dare I say it, sometimes massage the truth. On the other hand, some Jews who witnessed what happened under the Nazis may have reported exactly what they saw, but this was interpreted by others to confirm the standard view. Another possibility is that they themselves interpreted what was happening around them in terms of allied propaganda or pre-war rumours. I don’t claim to know the truth. On the basis of what I’ve read, I simply question the standard view.

In a society which proclaims the right to free thought and speech, can this really be wrong? Should I suppress my thoughts, or if I’m unable to do this, should I simply keep my mouth shut for fear of upsetting those whose identity is so tied up with the ‘Holocaust’?

Perhaps I would do this, if I didn’t believe that the group whose identity is so tied up with ‘the Holocaust’ is collectively oppressing the Palestinians. Politicians with the power to rectify the crimes committed in Palestine back off because of the fear they will be accused of enabling ‘another Holocaust,’ or to put it more simply, of anti-Semitism.

You will notice that I put inverted commas round the word ‘Holocaust’. This is because I believe we need to draw attention to the almost religious nature of the ‘Holocaust’ story. Maybe my doubts about the standard version of what happened under the Nazis are unjustified. Future historians will be the judge of that.

But I have no doubts about the use of ‘the Holocaust’ for political purposes, and this use is greatly enhanced by the special word and the capital H of ‘Holocaust,’ and still more by the prohibition on any questioning of the standard narrative. Fortunately in this country that prohibition is only moral and social; in many other countries it is legal. What a strange way to value the right to free thought and speech enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights!

About Francis Clark-Lowes

Francis was born in 1944, left public school at the age of 16, and started an engineering apprenticeship in a Manchester locomotive works. Later he gained a BSc in Sociology as an external student of London University. He worked for seven years in the Civil Service, mostly as an immigration officer at London Airport, during which time he studied Arabic.
Between 1975 and 1977 Francis walked from London to Cairo, spending eight months in Paris, three months in Vienna and three months in Israel on the way.
After marrying Angie back in Vienna, where he’d met her on his walk, they returned to Cairo to work in a secondary school for a year. From there they travelled on round the world, spending three months in Tokyo. Their son, Philip, was born back in London in 1979, after which they moved to Saudi Arabia where for nine years Francis worked for the national airline, Saudia, in English language training for nine years. Their daughter, Julia, was born in Jeddah in 1982.
On their return to live in Brighton in 1989, Francis studied in London for an MA of Antioch University, Ohio, in the Psychology of Therapy and Counselling. He went on to do doctoral research at the University of Sussex on the early psychoanalyst colleague of Freud, Wilhelm Stekel. Meanwhile he started to practise as a counsellor in primary care, and also privately.
Francis’s doctoral studies took place in the context of the Centre for German Jewish Studies at the University of Sussex. Through this Centre he was contracted to translate a number of German-Jewish books, including a biography of Theodore Herzl, the founder of modern political Zionism.
But as a strong supporter of Palestinian rights, he found the pro-Zionist and Jewish-chauvinist atmosphere of the Centre problematical. How could the Palestinians succeed against the powerful narrative which the Centre demonstrated? It was this question which led him into active campaigning for the Palestinians. He served two terms as Chair of Palestine Solidarity Campaign between 1998 and 2001, and meanwhile founded and chaired the Brighton & Hove branch.
Sometime after gaining his doctorate in 1999, Francis inaugurated a series of classes under his organisation called ‘Invitation to Learn’ ranging across psychology, sociology, philosophy and politics. These finally ended in 2010 when Francis was diagnosed with prostate cancer, for which he has been successfully treated. He has also retired from counselling. At the beginning of 2011 he published his doctoral thesis under the title Freud’s Apostle.
In April 2011 Francis was expelled from the Brighton & Hove branch of PSC for alleged anti-Semitism, following his questioning of aspects of ‘the Holocaust’. A month later he was expelled from national PSC for the same reason. In January 2012 he unsuccessfully appealed his expulsion from national PSC, thereby fuelling a debate about PSC’s preoccupation with the sensitivities of Jews at the expense of the Palestinians.
Francis separated from Angie in 1995, and in 2009 he married Christine. Both he and Christine are now active members of the Unitarian Church, which they joined after their wedding there.
His hobbies include walking, music and family history.

10 Responses to Questioning ‘the Holocaust’

The holocaust became the most useful “tool” for cementing the belief among Jews, that Jews are the world’s singular victims. There is a great deal riding on the orthodox dogma. The holocaust is a extraordinary cash-cow, and self-pity-cow; it has become the fuel that powers Jewish victim mythology. This self-chosen victim supremacy is chauvinistic and racist at it’s core, and is the cause of a good deal of animosity that gentiles feel for Jews.

You were punished for thinking for yourself, but it is nothing new for humanity. The Bolsheviks killed millions in the gulag concentration camps and the Cheka cellar for having their own thoughts. The Nazis filled concentration camps with people who thought for themselves. That is the company your detractors find themselves in. And since they want to be ideologically aligned with the Cheka and the Nazis, I must ask you, why are you attempting to remain in their company? I hope when you have a chance to put a good deal of distance between yourself and these anti-Semite thought police, you will realize that it is the best thing that could have happened to you.

The fact that this organization has allowed itself to be taken over by anti-Zionist Zionists, and anti-racist racists, only goes to prove that it has been ruined as a force for good. When the anti-Semite police are allowed in the front door, the rot begins.

You have a point about PSC not being worth my appeal against expulsion. But I’ve had a lot of history with this organisation (I was Chair a while back), and would still like to believe it could be a force for good. But a lot would have to change for that to happen.

“But I’ve had a lot of history with this organisation (I was Chair a while back), and would still like to believe it could be a force for good.”

I thought about that very fact on my morning walk, after writing to you. I remember thinking that Mr. Clark-Lowes quite likely put a good bit of positive energy, and a good bit of his life into this organization, only to have it thrown back into his face. But certainly you had to have had a positive impact on the lives of many people, and you are to be commended for your efforts by those of us who recognize that fact.

They have chosen to hand you a truck-load of lemons; it’s a golden opportunity for you to make lemonade. They may try to silence you through stigma and name calling, but in reality, they have elevated you as an example of honesty and truth. You will likely rise above their shortsightedness, and continue to be a positive force for people who need someone like you to speak for them. It’s a stepping-stone toward greater things. Best of luck to you, Francis — and keep fighting the good fight.

Thanks for your kind and thoughful words. Yes, it is the way you describe it. What I said in my appeal speech about organisations turning in on themselves when their real enemy appears too strong is I think the explanation of this atrocious behaviour. Have you seen how cats will start to wash themselves furiously when they’re frustrated? In a rather similar way these zealots want to cleanse PSC of all thinking of which they don’t approve rather than recognise the real problem faced by the Palestinians, that is Jewish collective power. This is certainly a very uncomfortable conclusion to reach, and I’m also not at all sure how it can be resolved, but refusing to talk about it is not, for me, an option.

The Holocaust is just a ‘brand of suffering’, trademarked by Jews. Many people have suffered. Many more have died. Stalin killed more. The ‘Holocaust’ is just there to underpin the “Jewisth/Zionist” Myth. They use it to connect their doctrine from Bible to now and justify their sense of “chosen-ness”. This is ridiculous.

It is ridiculous indeed, but very effective. The ‘Holocaust’s’ use may, however, wear out, and then it will become a liability. I predict that the very people who are so keen to insist on orthodoxy now will, when this happens, suddenly start to say: ‘Well, we never really believed that; it was just unkind to the survivors to say so.’

A big zionist guilt trip then… > Here is an interesting true story. I grew up in Western Australia. When I was about seven we had what I now realise was hasbara teaching. In essence we were told the zionist myth > the misunderstood persecuted Jews went to Israel where there were a few arabs there, who were not doing much with the Land. The Jews turned the desert into an oasis and were spiritual and peaceful. Shalom. (No mention of the arabs again) They had Kibutzes and had diferent festivals. I was always a very curious and questioning child. I asked my teacher.

Where is Israel?

Israel is tiny country on the other side of the planet near the Meditarean sea. ~ answered my teacher

Then why are we learning about such a small place (Israel) that is so far away? ~ I asked.

My teacher paused and looked at me.

Israel is special. The Jewish people were chosen to make Israel, and it became an oasis in the desert. They transformed a desert into lush fertile lands. Israel is SPECIAL

Not a lot I could say to that. We spent some time learning Jewish tradition, hebrew and so forth. Bear in mind we never were taught anything about the indeginous aboroginees who lived there, yet we were being taught about Israel.

I mention it as example of the reach and depth of zionist propaganda. The Holocaust of cause underpins much of this ‘Special-ness’.

Yes, that fits entirely with what I’m saying. Excuse my asking, but was this a Jewish school? I’m thinking it probably wasn’t. If not, one has the additional interesting question as to why so many non-Jews should feel such an affinity with Jewish suffering and Jewish success. I wonder whether it has something to do with the liberal conscience. Liberals prove their credentials by being pro-Jewish. Perhaps in Australia there is the additional factor on seeing Jews as allies in dispossessing indigenous populations. I note you say you learnt nothing about the aborgines. I have a feeling a similar motivation exists in the US. Plucky little Israel is doing to the Paletstinians what big beafy America did to the indigenous peoples.

No it was not a Jewish school. But we had Jewish lessons for some time. I think the cleverness of the Zionist myth marketing is such, that it has very wide appeal. From liberal to labour to extreme right wing they all can relate.

Don’t get me started on the Aborignees, a terrible travesty. Australia is very zionistic in the way Israel is. They see the ‘Abos’ in just the same way. Australians in my experience are generally very racist and yes I do think they see a ally with the colonizing Zionists.